CCS Activities in Japan

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 1 CCS Activities in Japan Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and Carbon Capture and Storage 10-11 September 2007 UN, New York Makoto Akai, AIST

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 2 Technical R&D Contents Research on non-technological aspects Public perception, Accounting, Applicability to CDM, Confidence building on CCS, etc. Development of regulatory framework by the Ministry of Environment Prime Minister s Cool Earth 50 initiative

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 3 Late 80 s: Technical R&D in Japan Proposal of the concept of CCS Early 90 s: Independent research activities in National Labs., Electric Utilities, Universities, etc. Comprehensive feasibility study on performance and cost analysis Mid 90 s -: Establishment of R&D projects under METI (former MITI)

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 4 METI s Technical R&D Program on CCS (1997 - ) Diversified portfolio approach considering the storage potential, risk, etc. Ocean sequestration ti (1997 -) Focused on environmental assessment and ddevelopment on near-zero impact technology Geological storage (2000 - ) Nagaoka project ECBM (2000 - ) Yubari project

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 5 RITE/ENAA - NAGAOKA project Injected CO 2 : 10,405 t (2003-2005)

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 6 Experimental Site and Core Sample Nagaoka, Japan CO 2 was injected into this structure Porosity (φ) = 24 ~ 25% Core Sample Porosity describes how densely the material is packed, and defined by the proportion of the non-solid volume to the total volume Examples: φ < 1% for solid granite; φ > 50% for peat and clay

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 7 Big Earthquake and Nagaoka Project Niigata Chuetsu Earthquake Main shock: 23 Oct 2004 M6.8 8 at 10km depth Distance between the epicenter and the injection site is about 20km. The ground motions at the CO 2 injection site was 705 gal (maximum). Injection was automatically stopped at tthe main shock. 50km Iwanohara site 20km Epicenter Seismic intensity 7 6 + 6-5 + 5 - (GSJ, 2004 http://www.gsj.jp/jishin/chuetsu_1023/) 4

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 8 Response to Big Earthquake in Nagaoka Injection Project Injection was automatically ti stopped at the main shock. Safety inspection made: Surface Inspection Press & Temp Geophysical Logging Acoustic Borehole Televiewer Cross Well Seismic Tomography Injection was carefully resumed after confirming safety (6 Dec 2004) Injection rate: 40t-CO 2 /day Access road to the injection site No damage to the project

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 9 Non-technical R&D Public perception, Accounting, Applicability to CDM, Confidence building on CCS, etc.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 10 Public Perception Study Conducted d in December 2003 N=1006 (acceptance ratio 64%) Sampling Method: multistage t stratified tifi sampling Tokyo n=504 Sapporo n=502 Summer :hot and humid Winter: mild climate Age :mean=47.3 yeas old Sex :female=50.6% Summer : pleasant climate Winter: severe climate

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 11 To What Extent Public Know CCS Iron fertilization Wind energy Carbon capture and storage Solar energy Sink by forestation Bioenergy/ biomass Nuclear energy Hydrogen cars (Fuel cell vehicles) More efficient i cars More efficient appliances 82.0 3.7 43.6 68.8 2.9 37.2 9.7 38.0 48.1 4.3 41.5 22.7 44.6 4.4 44.0 17.2 44.7 12.5 5.4 52.2 22.2 9.0 59.8 52.1 34.0 17.8 54.1 32.6 51.6 37.8 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 Ratio of respoindents (%) I don't know it at all. I have heard of or read about it. I know it to some extent. About 30% have heard of CCS.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 12 Sources of Information on CCS Paper or seminar by expert 2% Internet 5% Acquaintanc es or Family 5% Others 1% Newspaper p 35% TV program 36% Magazine or Book 16% TV and newspaper account for 1/3 respectively.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 13 Yes / No about CCS About promoting CCS toward implementation as a part of climate policy portfolio (5 level rating scale) 48 4.8 Version A + B (Mean: 3.40) Version B (Limited education) (Mean: 3.34) Version A (Full education) (Mean: 3.45) 11.3 39.5 27.5 16.3 5.9 12.5 38.6 27.1 15.6 3.6 10.2 40.3 27.9 17.0 1 (No.) 2(L (Lean No) 3 (?) 4(LeanYes) 5 (Yes.) 0 20 40 60 80 100 Ratio of respondents (%)

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 14 Yes / No about CCS About implementation by type of CCS? (5 level rating scale) Offshore (Mean: 2.81) Onshore (Mean: 2.61) Lake type (Mean: 2.54) Dilution type (Mean: 2.33) 12.6 20.2 44.8 17.0 47 4.7 2.7 14.7 25.9 45.0 10.8 17.1 27.7 40.2 2.2 12.2 1.0 21.4 33.0 36.5 75 7.5 1 (No.) 2 (Lean No) 3 (?) 4(LeanYes) 5 (Yes.) 0 20 40 60 80 100 Ratio of respondents (%)

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 15 Findings (1) CCS is still not a well-known technology in Japan. Factor analysis identified four underlying factors for public s views about CCS. concern about risk and leakage, understanding of effectiveness of CCS, responsibility for mitigation of CO 2, concern about use of fossil fuel

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 16 Findings (2) Public is possessing positive opinions i in general for R&D promotion of CCS but rather negative opinions for implementation of each of the four specifics type of CCS technologies covered in the survey. Japanese public are expected not to voice extreme opinions about CCS.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 17 Findings (3) Providing more education would increase public acceptability and thereby reduce fundamental opposition. Onshore geological storage needs a careful communication strategy because it is the only of the four CCS options where the amount of education did not influence public perceptions.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 18 On-Going Public Perception Study Conducted d in February March 2007 To make comparative analysis To study the impact of information provided Analysis is underway but Initial assessment reveals that t general public would be influenced by the opinion of so called intellectuals t l regardless of their expertise

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 19 A Research Project on Accounting Rules on CO 2 Sequestration for National GHG Inventories (ARCS) ARCS Project Duration: FY02-0606 Contact: Makoto Akai (m.akai@aist.go.jp) i National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 20 Scope of ARCS project To develop models to assess effectiveness of storage and conduct case studies for various CO 2 injection scenarios To propose guideline and/or protocol for accounting sequestered CO 2 into GHG emission inventories through thought experiment using developed models To assess socio-economic and policy implications of the technology through energy modeling and evaluation of business opportunities

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 21 APPROACH Emission Estimation Methodology IPCC Framework Scientific assessment UNFCCC Framework Workable rules Accounting Rules for National Inventories Accounting Rules for Project-based Activities

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 22 Progress Proposal of leakage estimation and accounting rules for CCS Discussion Papers, which cover: Accounting rules for National Inventories Accounting rules for project-based activities Discussion paper was used as a text in the LA meeting to develop 2006 IPCC Guideline Case study for CCS-CDM to develop PDD. Additional support from METI for in- depth CCS-CDM Studies (FY04-05)

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 23 The Challenge Submission of Methodologies to CDM Executive Board Recovery of anthropogenic CO 2 from large industrial GHG emission sources and its storage in an oil reservoir EOR Mitsubishi UFJ Securities (MUS) The capture of CO 2 from natural gas processing plants and liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants and its storage in underground aquifers or abandoned oil/gas reservoirs Aquifer storage Mitsubishi Research Institute, Inc. (MRI) and JGC Corporation.

Workshop on Confidence Building in the long-term effectiveness of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Geological Storage 24-25 25 January 2007 Tokyo, Japan

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 25 Advantage of using multiple lines of reasoning 25 Monitoring of system evolution Natural analogues Monitoring of system evolution Natural analogues Geological information Industrial Geological Industrial analogues information analogues Safety assessment Risk prediction Safety assessment Integrated arguments and evidence to support effectiveness of long-term storage Quantitative input to the assessment Observation and qualitative Cross reference and integration of information (not used directly) independent evidence

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 26 Toward a Policy Agenda

Recent Progress on Regulatory Framework for Sub-seabed Storage of Captured Carbon Dioxide

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 28 Background In conjunction with the amendment of Annex I to the London Protocol 1996, Japan schedules to amend Law Relating to the Prevention of Marine Pollution and Maritime Disaster in order to manage and implement Carbon Dioxide (CO 2 ) sequestration in sub-seabed seabed geological formations in an appropriate manner.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 29 Recent Development (1/2) September 25, 2006 Environment Minister consulted Central Environment Council about the utilization i of the sub-seabed CCS to help prevent climate change and on the framework for regulating SS-CCS to protect marine environment. February 20, 2007 The Council submitted the report to the Minister.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 30 Recent Development (2/2) March 9, 2007 Based on the Council report, GOJ(MOEJ) drafted d the bill on the revision i of Marine Pollution Control Law, and submitted to the Diet. May 23, 2007 The bill was adopted by the Diet (promulgated on May 30).

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 31 Permit from Minister of the Environment Any party who plans to conduct CO 2 Storage to Sub Seabed Formation (CS-SSGF) shall submit application document including, but not limited to, the implementation plan, the environmental impact assessment and the monitoring plan, and shall obtain a fix-term permit from the Minister of the Environment. The Minister i of the Environment issues the permit to the applicant only when: 1. Proposed site and method of the CS-SSGF do not cause any adverse effects on the marine environment where the CS-SSGF takes place; and 2. No other appropriate disposal methods are available.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 32 Application range of the framework In the event of a CO 2 leak, its impact on the marine environment will be the same regardless of the pathway or method of CO 2 injection into sub-seabed geological formations. Therefore, CS-SSGF with direct access from on-shore, which h is excluded d from definition i i of dumping in the London Protocol 1996, is also subject to this provision i and shall obtain a permit from the Minister of the Environment.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 33 Term of permit and its renewal The permit is issued for a maximum period of five years. The Minister of the Environment will consider the renewal of the permit taking the state of operation and the possible impact on the environment into consideration.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 34 Site-selection criteria Any party who plans to conduct CS-SSGF shall evaluate migration of CO 2 and leakage pathways, by reservoir simulations or other appropriate methods, based on the geological/hydrological g g features of the site. The party shall prove: 1. that the stability/integrity y of storage is guaranteed; 2. that the capacity of reservoir is large enough compared to the total anticipated volume of the CO 2 steams; and 3. that appropriate mitigation measures are available in the event of a leak.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 35 Consideration of reducing disposal amounts of CO 2 and other disposal options Under the current regulatory framework on disposal into the sea of wastes and other matter from vessels, etc., further attempts to reduce the necessity for disposal into the sea are required before disposal into the sea, based on WAF. In the case of CS-SSGF, SSGF the practical regulatory framework will be discussed, based on conditions i to be included d in CO2- WAG.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 36 Action list concerning the concentration of CO 2 and impurities in a CO 2 stream The amended Annex I to the London Protocol 1996 stated that CO 2 streams to be considered for dumping consist overwhelmingly of CO 2. In addition, Annex II requires developing a national Action List to provide a mechanism for screening, which in principle bans dumping if it is not in compliance. In the case of CS-SSGF SSGF in Japan, the numerical limits are to be established in order to judge if CO 2 streams consist overwhelmingly of CO 2,andto confirm absence of high concentration of toxic substances such as sulfur dioxide. Those numerical limits and necessary criteria will be determined later in consideration with the international ti trends.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 37 Assessment of potential effects on the marine environment in the event of a leak Any party who plans to conduct CS-SSGF shall submit an impact assessment report to address potential impacts in the event of a leak, as stated in CO2-WAG. Main items of the assessment are described below. 1. Characterization of CO 2 streams to be disposed into a sub-seabed geological formation 2. Leakage case scenarios with its location and amount of leakage 3. Description of the current marine environment including marine life 4. Simulation results of possible changes in the marine environment and assessment of its impact, based on the leakage case scenarios The Minister of the Environment examines the impact assessment report, and issues a permit only when the minister confirms that the CCS has no potential risks to the marine environment.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 38 Monitoring (1/4) Monitoring is one of the essential elements in a CS-SSGF project, to verify that no CO2 leaks from the reservoir, at the same time to know the possible changes in the marine environment. Therefore, any party who plans to conduct CS-SSGF SSGF shall submit the monitoring i plan as a part of application documents for the review by the Minister i of the Environment.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 39 Monitoring (2/4) Once injection starts, monitoring is conducted in accordance with the monitoring plan. Main monitoring items are listed below. 1. Injection pressure and formation pressure 2. CO 2 migrations in the formation 3. Parameters of sea water such as CO 2 concentration and ph 4. Impact on marine life

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 40 Monitoring (3/4) Appropriate monitoring methods are selected in consideration of progress in science and technology, impact of monitoring itself on the environment, and other related issues. Since CS-SSGF aims long-term storage of CO 2 into sub-seabed b geological l formations, monitoring is required not only for the duration of injection, i but also after the cease of injection (post closure).

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 41 Monitoring (4/4) The actual period of the post closure monitoring is left for future solution, and the post closure monitoring needs to be conducted in view of the international trends such as CDM verification methods. Possible conditions are that the formation pressure decreases to the pre-injection level, or that the accuracy of the numerical simulations reaches a satisfactory level. The party conducting CS-SSGF is required to report the monitoring results periodically to the Minister of the Environment.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 42 Response to the potential impact on the marine environment (1/2) In case monitoring results indicate that CO 2 migration or impact on the marine environment does not stay within the range of assessments, the party conducting CS- SSGF shall take corrective actions described below. If this is the case, the party shall immediately inform the Minister of the Environment of the monitoring i results and the planned corrective actions.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 43 Response to the potential impact on the marine environment (2/2) The party is also required to report on the implementation of the actions as well as subsequent periodical monitoring results. 1. Corrective action CO 2 leakage in the injection phase The party is required to take mitigation actions such as cease of the injection activity and formation pressure release. The party is also required to continue monitoring with high frequency until the migration of CO 2 and the impact on the marine environment settle within the initial range of estimates. 2. Corrective action CO 2 leakage in the post-closure phase The party is required to take mitigation actions such as formation pressure release. The party is also required to continue monitoring with high frequency until the migration of CO 2 and the impact on the marine environment settle within the initial range of estimates.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 44 Development of Guidelines With this amendment, the regulatory framework for CS-SSGF was established in accordance with Annex II (WAF) to the London Protocol 1996. Specific Guidelines for the Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Streams for Disposal into Sub-seabed Geological Formations (CO2-WAG) have been developed.

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 45 From R&D towards a Policy Agenda Until recently, CCS has been discussed under the environmental R&D policy in METI Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry discussed CCS in the development of Energy Technology Vision 2100 released in 2005. New National Energy Strategy (2006) and revised Basic Plan on Energy (2007) refers to CCS

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 46 Prime Minister s Cool Earth 50 Initiative

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 47 Innovative Technologies for Significant Reductions of CO 2 Emissions

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Development and CCS; September 10-11, 2007 48 Concluding Remarks CCS is now became an agenda for energy and environmental policy, however there still exist needs for Significant cost reduction Incentives including appropriate mechanisms Confidence by public, scientists and policy makers and if CCS is inevitable for Japan s policy Responsible body promoting RD&DD